XLG vs. MAGS

Last updated Jun 13, 2026

XLG (Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF) and MAGS (Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - XLG is a S&P 500 fund tracking the S&P 500 Top 50 Index, while MAGS is a Technology Equities fund actively managed by Roundhill. XLG is passively managed, while MAGS is actively managed. Over the past 3 years, XLG returned 22.23%/yr vs 31.29%/yr for MAGS. Their correlation of 0.91 suggests significant overlap in exposure. XLG charges 0.20%/yr vs 0.29%/yr for MAGS.

Performance

XLG vs. MAGS - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XLG achieves a 3.62% return, which is significantly higher than MAGS's -1.59% return.

XLG

• 1D: 0.10%
• 1M: -3.40%
• YTD: 3.62%
• 6M: 4.26%
• 1Y: 21.79%
• 3Y*: 22.23%
• 5Y*: 15.12%
• 10Y*: 16.96%

MAGS

• 1D: 0.00%
• 1M: -7.97%
• YTD: -1.59%
• 6M: -0.43%
• 1Y: 23.09%
• 3Y*: 31.29%
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XLG vs. MAGS - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024	2023
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	3.62%	19.51%	33.49%	22.04%
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	-1.59%	22.99%	63.97%	35.74%

Correlation

The correlation between XLG and MAGS is 0.91, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.91
Correlation (3Y) Calculated over the trailing 3-year period	0.91
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Apr 11, 2023	0.91

The correlation between XLG and MAGS has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.91 to 0.91 - a consistent structural relationship.

XLG vs. MAGS - Sectors Allocation Comparison

Sectors	XLG	MAGS
Technology	43.9%	15.3%
Communication Services	17.1%	9.1%
Consumer Cyclical	11.3%	10.3%
Financial Services	9.6%	-
Healthcare	7.0%	-
Consumer Defensive	5.8%	-
Energy	2.7%	-
Industrials	1.9%	-
Basic Materials	0.6%	-
Real Estate	-	-
Utilities	-	-

Return for Risk

XLG vs. MAGS — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

XLG

XLG Risk / Return Rank: 48
XLG Sharpe Ratio Rank: 53
XLG Sortino Ratio Rank: 50
XLG Omega Ratio Rank: 52
XLG Calmar Ratio Rank: 40
XLG Martin Ratio Rank: 45

MAGS

MAGS Risk / Return Rank: 33
MAGS Sharpe Ratio Rank: 36
MAGS Sortino Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Omega Ratio Rank: 34
MAGS Calmar Ratio Rank: 29
MAGS Martin Ratio Rank: 32

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

XLG vs. MAGS - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) and Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	XLG	MAGS	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	1.60	1.14	+0.46
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.19	1.62	+0.56
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.29	1.20	+0.08
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	1.76	1.25	+0.52
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	6.46	4.21	+2.25

XLG vs. MAGS - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current XLG Sharpe Ratio is 1.60, which is higher than the MAGS Sharpe Ratio of 1.14. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of XLG and MAGS, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

XLG vs. MAGS - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XLG drawdown since its inception was -52.39%, which is greater than MAGS's maximum drawdown of -29.91%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XLG and MAGS.

Drawdown Indicators

	XLG	MAGS	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-52.39%	-29.91%	-22.48%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-12.41%	-18.62%	+6.21%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-20.70%	-29.91%	+9.21%
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-28.02%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-30.46%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-5.06%	-8.50%	+3.44%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-7.64%	-4.72%	-2.92%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	3.38%	5.50%	-2.12%

Volatility

XLG vs. MAGS - Volatility Comparison

The current volatility for Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF (XLG) is 4.31%, while Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF (MAGS) has a volatility of 5.86%. This indicates that XLG experiences smaller price fluctuations and is considered to be less risky than MAGS based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	XLG	MAGS	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	4.31%	5.86%	-1.55%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	10.41%	15.07%	-4.66%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	13.70%	20.30%	-6.60%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	18.73%	25.97%	-7.24%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	18.87%	25.97%	-7.10%

XLG vs. MAGS - Expense Ratio Comparison

XLG has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is lower than MAGS's 0.29% expense ratio.

Dividends

XLG vs. MAGS - Dividend Comparison

XLG's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.62%, less than MAGS's 1.50% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
MAGS Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF	1.50%	1.48%	0.81%	0.44%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
XLG Invesco S&P 500 Top 50 ETF	0.62%	0.64%	0.72%	0.97%	1.34%	0.94%	1.25%	1.58%	2.00%	1.85%	2.00%	2.09%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both XLG and MAGS in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.91, XLG and MAGS move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, XLG or MAGS?

MAGS has higher volatility (5.86%) compared to XLG (4.31%). In terms of maximum drawdown, XLG dropped -52.39% vs MAGS's -29.91%.

Which ETF is better, XLG or MAGS?

On 3-year performance, MAGS leads with 31.29% vs 22.23% for XLG. On fees, XLG is cheaper at 0.20% per year. On volatility, XLG has been the lower-risk option at 4.31%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, XLG or MAGS?

Over the 3-year period, MAGS has performed better with a 31.29% return vs 22.23%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, XLG or MAGS?

XLG is cheaper with a 0.20% expense ratio, compared with 0.29% for MAGS.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, XLG or MAGS?

MAGS has the higher dividend yield at 1.50%, compared with 0.62% for XLG.

What is the main difference between XLG and MAGS?

XLG is categorized as S&P 500, while MAGS is Technology Equities. They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Roundhill. Their fees differ too: 0.20% for XLG and 0.29% for MAGS.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

XLG currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (1.60 vs 1.14), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.